Arch Insurance Co v. Scott Dellinger et al
Arch Insurance Co |
Scott Dellinger, Curtis Cable, Don Wade, Kent Pramhus, Foothill Aircraft Sales and Service Inc a California corporation doing business as Foothill Aircraft Sales and Does 1-20, inclusive |
5:2014cv00120 |
January 17, 2014 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Jesus G Bernal |
Sheri Pym |
Insurance |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Other Contract |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 18, 2014. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by plaintiff Arch Insurance Co. Dismissal is without prejudice. (Montanari, Garry) |
![]() |
Filing 4 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (adu) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Arch Insurance Co, identifying Corporate Parent Arch Insurance Group for Arch Insurance Co. (adu) (adu). |
Filing 2 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) #1 as to Defendants Curtis Cable, Scott Dellinger, Foothill Aircraft Sales and Service Inc, Kent Pramhus, Don Wade. (adu) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants Curtis Cable, Scott Dellinger, Does, Foothill Aircraft Sales and Service Inc, Kent Pramhus, Don Wade. Case assigned to Judge Jesus G. Bernal for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym.(Filing fee $ 400.00 paid), filed by plaintiff Arch Insurance Co.(adu) (adu). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.